What about the Dinosuars?

Deinonychus are thought to have been highly social, organising themselves into complex communities in order to work together.

During their development, Deinonychus evolved an iconic five-inch claw on the foot, which was highly dexterous, and could be retracted and moved back and forth. Initially, this would have served a purpose in hunting and combat, though it would later have been useful in the performance of complex motor skills such as puncturing fabrics,making written inscriptions and so on. The special success of this early dromaeosaur is partly explicable by its long tail, which acting as a counterbalance allowed the use of both the hands and feet in dexterous activityAbove: The Pacific Ocean

We really need to get Trey Parker and Matt Stone down here to do something about this.

If you really believe this, you would be able to show us some proof or evidence. But you cant.

Where are the writings, drawings or inscriptions from these dinosaurs? They don't exist.

Where is the proof that they built boats? There would definitely be some proof left over! They must have used tools, which would have left evidence of so!

Where is the proof that they built boats? There would definitely be some proof left over! They must have used tools, which would have left evidence of so!

Of all the dinosaurs, who existed ever, what percentage have been found in fossilised remains? Tools made of wood or anything remotely biodegradable, papers, parchments, wood carvings, fabrics, etc. would be incredibly unlikely to survive into the fossilisation stage, based on the tiny percentage of ANYTHING which does. Of the literal billions of dromaeosaurs which would have existed throughout their history, the number of ones which have been preserved probably scarcely pushes one hundred.

Logged

"For your own sake, as well as for that of our beloved country, be bold and firm against error and evil of every kind." - David Wardlaw Scott, Terra Firma 1901

Then we're all agreed. You have no evidence that that dinosaurs built boats.

Thankyou for contributing to the debate!

Actually, I do! The fossil distributions of Deinonychus' descendants, Adasaurus (in the Far East) and Dromaeosaurus (in North America) testify that though they shared a common ancestor they evolved distinct characteristics reflecting their diverging cultures and seperation by ocean. If Pangea existed, and they did not colonise by water, then how would you be able to explain the fact that the Deinonychus gene pool split so sharply? No Dromaeosaurus fossils that I know of have been found in the Far East, and no Adasaurus fossils in the Americas. Plus, no Deinonychus fossils have been found in Asia either, corroborating the colonisation hypothesis.

According to the Pangea theory, the Deinonychus would have walked back and forth between China and America and would never even have evolved distinct cultures and consequent physical adaptions because they would never have been seperated. I.e., the theory of Pangea is INCOMPATIBLE with the observable evidence from the fossil record.

« Last Edit: May 28, 2009, 05:20:10 AM by Dogplatter »

Logged

"For your own sake, as well as for that of our beloved country, be bold and firm against error and evil of every kind." - David Wardlaw Scott, Terra Firma 1901

No the theory of Pangea is entirely compatible with observable evidence from the fossil record.

As to Deinonychus, Adasaurus and Dromaeosaurus. It's called evolution.

The domestic cat is a descendent of lions and tigers. Therefore cats built boats.

Your debating skills suck big time.

Yes, it is called evolution. Did you read my post? If you did, you certainly didn't comprehend it properly. The fact that Adasaurus and Dromaeosaurus evolved along seperate lines on a micro-level is evidence that the two populations were seperated. Pangea theory necessitates that they lived in the same place. If Pangea theory is true, there would have been a single homogenous Deinonychus population.

But still, for comedy's sake, why don't you post your evidence that dinosaurs built boats.

I just did, but apparently you're too much of a dumbshoe to actually understand it. Do you get it? All modern observations suggests that populations seperated by ocean micro-evolve along different lines depending on their different selection pressures, whereas homogenous populations face the same selection pressures and evolve as a single population. Pangea theory posits that a single population of Deinonychus habitated a conjoined continent of North America and Far East Asia. Fossil evidence proves that two discrete populations of Dromaeosaur descended from Deinonychus existed, one in North America, one in Asia, and over time evolved differently because they were seperated in that manner.

Logged

"For your own sake, as well as for that of our beloved country, be bold and firm against error and evil of every kind." - David Wardlaw Scott, Terra Firma 1901

There is so much nonsense being spouted by RE'ers in this thread. Can someone explain to me why building a nest is more complex than building a raft? One involves creating a sound structure out of wood, and the other... the same thing. There have been numerous scientific experiments in the last few years which have shown that crows are capable not only of creating and manipulationg tools from memory, but that they can 'invent' new tools to serve a specific purpose when a given a completely new task.

The way I see it, anything a bird can do, a dinosaur can. If a bird can build nests and create tools, then a dinosaur, with superior muscle strength and limb control, would surely be able to acheive more. Not to mention the fact that the actual biology of dinosaur brains is largely guess-work on the part of scientists, as all we have to go on is the relatively scant fossil record. Nobody has ever seena dinosaur brain, and whilst skull shapes can reveal quite a bit, they cannot reveal everything.

If birds can build nests and use tools, then I believe that dinosaurs, with large muscles, powerful claws and sharp teeth, could easily build ocean going rafts or simple boats.

Logged

"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

Two populations diverged on the same continent. Just like lions / tigers / domestic cats. How does this give us a Dinotopia civilisation with TRex dockers again?

So why are there NO Adasaurus fossils in the Americas and NO Dromaeosaurus fossils in Asia? If the species diverged on your mythical super-continent, there would be no rigid division of fossil remains based on the ocean boundary which you claim didn't even exist at the time. There is completely rigid division between the Adasaurus, which is EXCLUSIVELY FOUND in East Asia, and the Dromaeousaurus, which is EXCLUSIVELY FOUND in America, not a single counterexample exists.

If Dromaeosaurus and Adasaurus coexisted on the same supercontinent, the remains of both would be found in both North America and East Asia. They are not. One is found exclusively in Asia, one is found exclusively in America. Get this into your head.

Logged

"For your own sake, as well as for that of our beloved country, be bold and firm against error and evil of every kind." - David Wardlaw Scott, Terra Firma 1901

Can someone explain to me why building a nest is more complex than building a raft?

Is it the buoyancy problems, the stablility problems, the propulsion problems, the navigation problems or the rationing problems which you don't understand?

Navigation? Pah. Every year, millions upon millions of birds navigate across huge distances, proving that they have the ability to navigate, probably based on celestial movements. If they can do it, so could dinoaurs.

Buoyancy, stability, propulsion... you are making this sound overly complex. When the first humans built boats, I doubt they had that kind of terminology. I know what I'd do if I was building a raft. I'd think 'hey wooden stuff floats!', and than I'd tie some of it together and see if floated. I'd experiment, and then by trial an error, figure out the best way to do it... just like birds do with nests and tools. Then I'd spread that knowledge and pass it on.

The reason birds can't build boats is, surprise surprise, because they can fly. Their species has never faced a situation where they could not travel by flight. Land-based dinosaurs did not have that capability, and thus may have faced population pressures that could only be eased by travelling over water. Who knows how it began? It could have been with river or lake crossings, then eventually, shoreline travel, and after that, who knows?

« Last Edit: May 28, 2009, 01:49:33 PM by NEEMAN »

Logged

"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

Building and using boats is just about one of the easiest things in the world. In an exploration context, once you've built the boat, you just get on it and sail until you hit land. Navigation is completely irrelevant if you don't even know what you're navigating towards.

Logged

"For your own sake, as well as for that of our beloved country, be bold and firm against error and evil of every kind." - David Wardlaw Scott, Terra Firma 1901

I defer to the first response, What do dinosaurs have to do with a flat earth?

And i'll go further, why do any FE'ers defend any position on dinosaurs? I didn't know FE'ers were experts on dinosaurs. This argument is moot isn't it?

Weather the dinosaurs built gas powered warships or floated on the backs of sea turtles to migrate or followed huge icy bridges to the ice wall then around to a different continent, it doesn't add or negate from a flat earth or round earth theory does it?

I guess the question is how does the intelligence, or existence of any dinosaur, or creature have anything to do with the shape of the planet? Seems moot to me.

Show me a bird that can build a boat. If you like, I'll let you untie its thumbs.

I've already answered this (frankly stupid) question by saying that the population pressures necessary to provoke seaa-faring 'behaviour' have never existed for birds, because they can fly. It's like asking me to show you a dolphin that can swim breast-stroke.

Logged

"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

Out of context and out of arguments: the tell-tale signs of a beaten RE'er.

Another victory for FE!

Logged

"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

Out of context and out of arguments: the tell-tale signs of a beaten RE'er.

Nope its perfectly within the context. It was you who drew up the parallel between dinosaurs and birds. Then it was you who said that such a comparison, with regard to boat building, was frankly stupid.

Cut by your own sword.

You're resorting to a childish interpretation of what I said, which is even more stupid than the original question. Obviously there are lots of things dinosaurs can do which birds can't, if you're going to take the statement literally. It was clearly an expression, and the point was equally obvious: at the very least, dinosaurs had mental faculties equal to that of modern birds. I would argue that they probably had greater mental faculties, and a better natural advantage in tool making.

However, unlike birds, dinosaurs faced limitations on their movement which birds did not. Birds can fly, whereas most dinosaurs were land-based creatures. The stupid, lumbering, monstrous dinosaur is a hollywood creation. If birds can fashion hooks to reach food on the first attempt in a set scenario, then isn't it possible that over time, dinosaurs could have used felled logs to cross rivers? Over time, could they not have developed an ability to craft proper rafts, perhaps even simple boats?

Modern humans are only about 200,000 years old. Dinosaurs ruled the earth for about 160 million years. Over that kind of timeline, any behaviour pattern is possible.

Logged

"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

You're resorting to a childish interpretation of what I said, which is even more stupid than the original question. Obviously there are lots of things dinosaurs can do which birds can't, if you're going to take the statement literally. It was clearly an expression, and the point was equally obvious: at the very least, dinosaurs had mental faculties equal to that of modern birds. I would argue that they probably had greater mental faculties, and a better natural advantage in tool making.

However, unlike birds, dinosaurs faced limitations on their movement which birds did not. Birds can fly, whereas most dinosaurs were land-based creatures. The stupid, lumbering, monstrous dinosaur is a hollywood creation. If birds can fashion hooks to reach food on the first attempt in a set scenario, then isn't it possible that over time, dinosaurs could have used felled logs to cross rivers? Over time, could they not have developed an ability to craft proper rafts, perhaps even simple boats?

Modern humans are only about 200,000 years old. Dinosaurs ruled the earth for about 160 million years. Over that kind of timeline, any behaviour pattern is possible.

Then why have we not found any archeological evidence to support that dinosaurs had tools? Also keep in mind that the human brain size to body size ratio is close to 10 times that of any other animal, including dinosaurs, thus the reason we made tools in 150,000 years and they likely didn't in 160 million. You're also greatly underestimating the complexity of a craft required to cross an ocean. Without and form of power other than a sail it could take several months to cross an ocean and for a creature the size of a dinosaur, it would take several tons of food to survive for that length of time.

...This is all assuming you're actually serious and not joking(I haven't read the first 4 pages of this thread).

Logged

"If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed."

Lets compare the intelligence of dinosaurs to the average human. Could the average human build a boat and sail across the ocean? not without drowning halfway because of a poorly built craft.Dinosaurs weigh an awful lot more than an average human. There is not the slightest chance they could build a boat get on, sail somewhere and get off. Surely you have a less stupid sounding example than this.What did they do? Build a fucking Noah's Ark and sail across the Atlantic? hahahahaha

Lets compare the intelligence of dinosaurs to the average human. Could the average human build a boat and sail across the ocean? not without drowning halfway because of a poorly built craft.

Absolutely. Australia was seperated from Eurasia (even according to Pangea theory) at the time when the first humans colonised it (the Aborigines). They sailed hundreds of miles on crude rafts and boats made with very basic tools out of wood. Their boats would have been pretty terrible considering they had no prior experience building them, nor any concepts of engineering or physics beyond wildly inaccurate myths and fables.

Still requires construction of a boat big enough to carry 100 tonnes of dinosaur

Our test case, the Early-Cretacious North American Deinonychus, would have weighed a maximum of 73 kilograms, based on the very largest specimens which have ever been discovered. I weigh 76 kilograms, and I assure you, I have travelled on many boats without causing them to sink. I've actually travelled, even, on a crude raft of my own construction. It didn't sink.

As for large dinosaurs, let us turn our attention the Jurassic sauropod giants, Apatosaurus and Diplodocus, which would have preceded the Dromaeosaurs by several million years. Specimens of these two creatures, who of course would have great trouble traversing the ocean, are found exclusively on the North American continent. They were most probably not even sentient, and evidence suggests that they did not colonise by boat (or else they would also be found in Asia).

What about Saurolophus, the veritable cattle of the Cretacious? Adults of this species would have weighed roughly 1.9 tonnes, but specimens appear in both the Far East and America. However, we've already established that these animals were farmed by Deinonychus and the descendant forms, so the logistical problems associated with transporting them would have fallen upon the pioneers of the Asian colonisation. I think it's very likely that infant Saurolophus were transported in those colonial ships rather than full-grown adults, because as you say, a 1.9 tonne dinosaur does not make a brilliant skipper.

Funnily enough, the Asian species of Saurolophus is distinct in size (and consequently meat yield) from its North American counterpart. Highly improbable in the case of a single, wild homogenous population on a single Pangean super-continent. Highly explicable by two distinct populations, seperated by ocean and subject to agrarian selective breeding by another species.

« Last Edit: May 29, 2009, 02:45:29 AM by Dogplatter »

Logged

"For your own sake, as well as for that of our beloved country, be bold and firm against error and evil of every kind." - David Wardlaw Scott, Terra Firma 1901

This quote just about sums up this whole dinosaur thing. I try to be open minded about all the FE excuses science, but this dinosaur thing I cannot see happening. I have never actually laughed about any FE science, but this just seems ridiculous. Its just a dinosaur is so stupid and this was before more evolution into intelligent species. Even after millions of years of evolution the only species capable of building something like a boat is a human. How would a dinosaur of known that it could pile some wood together, tie it up somehow (this would be difficult) and put it on water and know they would float away somewhere. I try not to use the terms magical and fantasy when talking about FE, but its hard in this instance. For gods sake its like The Land Before Time.

It seems in this case it would be better for your theory to somehow change what you believe to incorporate a better idea. Whether or not the earth is round or flat the evidence for plate tectonics and continental drift is overwhelming.

The rest of your post is groundless speculation and shaky parallels. Just like Dogplatters. The only way to resolve this is for Dogplatter to post his evidence of Dinosaur boat building and civilisation.

I have posted a large body of evidence in favour of my thesis. Since you appear to have been unable to give it a synoptical reading, allow me to summarise each item of evidence. Further explanation of each is to be found in the several large posts which I have already made in this thread.

Fossil records demonstrating that Deinonychus evolved on the North American continent

Fossil records demonstrating that the descendants of Deinonychus developed on two seperate lines, one of which is exclusively found on the North American continent, one of which is exclusively found in Asia

Fossil records demonstrating that Saurolophus, a prey animal to Deinonychus and its descendants, developed on two seperate lines, one on the North American continent, one in Asia, consistent with selective breeding

Fossil records demonstrating that Apatosaurus and Diplodocus, two species unlikely to have been capable of maritime travel, are found exclusively on the North American continent, suggesting that simply walking to Asia was impossible

Evidence that opposable thumbs are not a prerequisite for tool use

Evidence that opposable thumbs are not a prerequisite for boat building

I'm not sure if that's a completely exhaustive list of all the evidence I have provided, but it's certainly a starting point for you since you seem not to have actually read the thesis I exhorted in previous posts. Perhaps while you're reading it you could see if there are any other pieces of evidence which I presented, but which I forgot to include in this list!

Logged

"For your own sake, as well as for that of our beloved country, be bold and firm against error and evil of every kind." - David Wardlaw Scott, Terra Firma 1901

Can I just ask if this is a recent "discovery" in FE history or have you always believed this?Surely there is another more plausible method for dinosaurs to traverse water. Swimming somehow? Hitching a ride on the back of a water dinosaur? Usually FE is quite good at coming up with some good explanations but I really just dont like this one.Why cant plate tectonics exist on FE?

Sorry to sound like Tom Bishop but

Quote

Evidence that opposable thumbs are not a prerequisite for tool useEvidence that opposable thumbs are not a prerequisite for boat building

Proof? Its probably already been presented, but I am very impatient and cant read a whole thread sorry

Can I just ask if this is a recent "discovery" in FE history or have you always believed this?Surely there is another more plausible method for dinosaurs to traverse water. Swimming somehow? Hitching a ride on the back of a water dinosaur? Usually FE is quite good at coming up with some good explanations but I really just dont like this one.Why cant plate tectonics exist on FE?

The notion that the dinosaurs were intelligent is not peculiar to the FE community, nor is it universally held by its members. I know myself and Michael to believe it, and though I'm not sure, Tom Bishop may also entertain the idea, John Davis certainly might as well. I would have to let these scholars speak for themselves.

Anyway, I know globular theorists to also have exhorted the notion.

Plate tectonics do exist. However, it is my opinion that they cannot affect the continents to such an extent that they might float all across the world and bunch together or rip apart as globularism claims, because the Earth would be rent in two, and this clearly has not happened.

Evidence that opposable thumbs are not a prerequisite for tool useEvidence that opposable thumbs are not a prerequisite for boat building

Proof? Its probably already been presented, but I am very impatient and cant read a whole thread sorry

Sorry you don't have time to read the whole thread, but anyway, an experiment determining these two facts is easily performed by a small group of people. Tape together the thumb and index finger, and the middle and ring finger, on each hand, and have your colleagues do the same. You will find that constructing a raft out of withies and logs is perfectly acheivable, I have done this test myself on a number of occasions.

Logged

"For your own sake, as well as for that of our beloved country, be bold and firm against error and evil of every kind." - David Wardlaw Scott, Terra Firma 1901

Sorry you don't have time to read the whole thread, but anyway, an experiment determining these two facts is easily performed by a small group of people. Tape together the thumb and index finger, and the middle and ring finger, on each hand, and have your colleagues do the same. You will find that constructing a raft out of withies and logs is perfectly acheivable, I have done this test myself on a number of occasions.

Wierdo... lolYeah I guess that seems like a fair enough test, just this would require a bit more intelligence, because it would be more difficult. Intelligence which the dinosaurs probably didnt have

KillaBee, if they had "just diverged" on a supercontinent, we would find specimens of both species in Asia AND America. We do not, we only find one in America and only find the other in Asia. Stop skirting the issue and answer this charge! Why do we ONLY find Adasaurus in Asia and ONLY find Dromaeosaurus in America if those continents were a single continent at the time? This is strong evidence against the Pangea thesis. You are refusing to answer this issue because you have no reasonable explanation in accordance with the Pangea theory.

Logged

"For your own sake, as well as for that of our beloved country, be bold and firm against error and evil of every kind." - David Wardlaw Scott, Terra Firma 1901

KillaBee, if they had "just diverged" on a supercontinent, we would find specimens of both species in Asia AND America. We do not, we only find one in America and only find the other in Asia. Stop skirting the issue and answer this charge! Why do we ONLY find Adasaurus in Asia and ONLY find Dromaeosaurus in America if those continents were a single continent at the time? This is strong evidence against the Pangea thesis. You are refusing to answer this issue because you have no reasonable explanation in accordance with the Pangea theory.

Why is there some "recent" animals we today only find in South Africa and not North Africa, or in Russia and not Denmark? Surely they would have to be all over the continent because there is nothing stopping them from walking a couple years north or south.

Why is there some "recent" animals we today only find in South Africa and not North Africa, or in Russia and not Denmark? Surely they would have to be all over the continent because there is nothing stopping them from walking a couple years north or south.

Climate precludes some species habitating certain areas. If the West coast of America and the East coast of Asia were right next to eachother, surely they'd have the same climate.

Logged

"For your own sake, as well as for that of our beloved country, be bold and firm against error and evil of every kind." - David Wardlaw Scott, Terra Firma 1901

Why is there some "recent" animals we today only find in South Africa and not North Africa, or in Russia and not Denmark? Surely they would have to be all over the continent because there is nothing stopping them from walking a couple years north or south.

Climate precludes some species habitating certain areas. If the West coast of America and the East coast of Asia were right next to eachother, surely they'd have the same climate.

What makes you say they were right next to eachother? Seems pretty far away from eachother to me

Oh, and South Africa and North Africa is right next to eachother. Or Germany and Denmark.

Why am i even trying to argue with someone that believes dinosaurs was as smart or smarter than humans??

North America and Asia are conjoined right up until the end of the Cretaceous in Pangea theory. Our case study takes place during the Early Cretaceous, during which time Pangea theory alleges that these continents were conjoined, as shown on the map you posted.

Logged

"For your own sake, as well as for that of our beloved country, be bold and firm against error and evil of every kind." - David Wardlaw Scott, Terra Firma 1901